How do you figure? Are you talking about String Theory? Check out the Cosmological Argument that Dr. Craig makes. I have refuted this argument heavily (I'm working on a post about refuting arguments like that).

Yea, I kinda had to explain what a theory was because to my knowledge they thought it was a guess. I think I explained what a theory was like 3 times. I really just got tired from arguing with them, but I feel like I would encounter more people like this in the future.

It's really, really sad how often the term "theory" gets taken out of context in these types of debates. It's called equivocation, and all you can really do when faced with it is try your damndest to step back and explain that sometimes, one word can mean more than one thing. Like arms, or train. Maybe link 'em to something like this: http://www.ecenglish.com/learnenglish/lessons/words-with-more-than-... although that might be taken as demeaning. But if the shoe fits...

Since it seems Atheists are better at doing research take a took at this link. I went around the site for a bit and I smelled an agenda. The article "Complexity of Cell's 'Molecular Shredder' Revealed" seems pretty scientific, it looks like they have done some research and it really looks like a good article until the very end when the article says "In addition to refuting random evolutionary processes for its existence, the complex exosome molecular machine shows every sign of carefully crafted system engineering." What is "carefully crafted system engineering"? The answer - God
I see an agenda, what do you see?

Good luck to you! Arguing with them is really quite meaningless after a while. You have some great ideas about arguing with them, but in the end they will either ignore your questions or throw them back at you without an answer. They don't think at all.

Evolution is not random , it is driven by natural selection . The fact that these creationist dolts use the word " random " in order to describe the driving force of evolution , is proof of their absolute lack of understanding of evolutionary theory .

Isn't it true that the genetic mutations upon which natural selection depends are, in fact, random. So random mutation does play a pretty crucial part in natural selection, doesn't it? It doesn't seem surprising to me that people who haven't studies the process would pick up on the word "random".

Even with a basic understanding of how evolution by natural selection works, it's pretty mind-blowing. A major problem, I believe, is that people quite naturally find it difficult to grasp the "incomprehensible" time scales both necessary and available for the process. People tend (again, naturally) to think of "a long time ago" as being when they were a kid.

It is, of course, off-pissing that people who DO understand the process choose to propagate the random aspect at the expense of the natural selection aspect.

Hey mike ,
Yes , mutations are random , but their ability to propagate relies on natural selection . Those extremely rare mutations that are helpful to the organism , will be passed on , otherwise they will disappear .
So , while mutations are indeed randomn , they are filtered through natural selection .